DIY Hardware Convolution Reverb? Anyone?

[AlgoRhythms]

I've been using the QRS plugin for several months now. Like you, I greatly preferred the original QRS hardware version to the Lexicon 480.

The software is considerably less costly. And for the most part, it sounds really good.
My impression is that it is not quite as dense and 3D like the original, but I'm basing that on memory vs actually comparing the hardware to the software. Also, I haven't gone as deeply into the edit mode as I used to do with the hardware.

Having said that, I really love the plug in and use it a lot when I want that sense of vast space that it does so well. Its really great for that.

And yes, the software defaults to the same HF rolloff but can be bypassed. I prefer to leave it in as big spaces don't naturally have extended HP content.

 

[RoadrunnerOZ]

Large space reverb algorithms are usually mimicking crowded concert halls etc where the audience soaks up a lot of the HF energy as do curtains and carpeting.

 

[dale116dot7]

I built this a number of years ago. It could only do a very short (IR of 20ms from what I recall) brute force convolution, or run an algorithmic reverb 5x (maybe more) of the complexity of a 224 or PCM70. Brute force requires a lot of MACs per sample, I never tried FFT convolution on it, that should be more efficient. It was a DSP56366 and loaded with a few megabytes of static RAM. If I was targeting a convolution reverb I’d probably design something with a dozen or maybe two dozen DSPs or maybe a bunch of FPGAs. I like the NXP DSPs for hobby projects, they are really easy to program in assembly language, the cycle efficiency and readability of doing common audio signal processing is good, the development environment (an assembler) is free, and they aren’t quite as complex to program on the bare metal as the TI unit.

 

[Tubetec]

I remember back to the adverts about the AMS gear ,
they used an 8086 processor inside , maybe the code could be back engineered and virtualised to run on modern hardware .

The idea of creating a standalone PC based effects unit for live and studio usage makes loads of sense with the price of older hardware, very good Firewire interfaces can be found cheaply since Apple abandoned the format .

The 2012 Mac book pro is a mighty machine , Ive heard more than a few reccomendations here .
I see near mint examples going for around 150 euros . Many Mac aficionados swear its the best machine they ever made .

 

[AlgoRhythms]

I remember back to the adverts about the AMS gear ,
they used an 8086 processor inside , maybe the code could be back engineered and virtualised to run on modern hardware .

The idea of creating a standalone PC based effects unit for live and studio usage makes loads of sense with the price of older hardware, very good Firewire interfaces can be found cheaply since Apple abandoned the format .

The 2012 Mac book pro is a mighty machine , Ive heard more than a few reccomendations here .
I see near mint examples going for around 150 euros . Many Mac aficionados swear its the best machine they ever made .

I'm not sure that I would go the hardware route anymore. Running software on a native computer seems to make more sense because of cost vs function. But I could be convinced to change my mind if the hardware sounded sufficiently better to justify the added cost.

 

[dale116dot7]

I remember back to the adverts about the AMS gear ,
they used an 8086 processor inside , maybe the code could be back engineered and virtualised to run on modern hardware .

The idea of creating a standalone PC based effects unit for live and studio usage makes loads of sense with the price of older hardware, very good Firewire interfaces can be found cheaply since Apple abandoned the format .

The 2012 Mac book pro is a mighty machine , Ive heard more than a few reccomendations here .
I see near mint examples going for around 150 euros . Many Mac aficionados swear it’s the best machine they ever made .

Equipment of that era often used some sort of regular processor for the user interface, Z80 was popular but others were also used. The audio processing was generally done by dedicated hardware as general purpose microprocessors were not fast enough to pull it off until at least the late 1990s and even then it was quite a stretch to do much in real time.

 

[Tubetec]

I picked up a TC Electronic 24D a few years back ,
It has internal DSP processing that works either standalone or with the addition of the PC as a GUI ,
The whole thing runs as its own self contained system ,without the need for a DAW ,
parameters and routing are all accessed from the TC control panel ,
Its runs the TC fabric C channel and Fabric R reverb ,very similar to the TC powercore hardware .
It will run both Fabric C and R in 48khz mode , but only one or the other in 96khz , avoiding the need to route signal through the Daw reduces latency which is an important factor with live performances or near realtime monitoring in cans while recording.